2005 MG ZS Reviews from UK and Ireland

2005 MG ZS 180 2.5 V6 petrol

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2012
Most recent year of ownership2013
Engine and transmission 2.5 V6 petrol Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.5 / 10
Distance when acquired40000 miles
Most recent distance52000 miles
Previous carPeugeot RCZ

Summary:

Great bargain and perfect driver's machine

Faults:

Inlet manifold needed to be replaced at 50,000 miles.

Tyre needed to be replaced after hitting a pot hole.

General Comments:

The car is very comfortable. The MG ZT seats mean it's a great long distance companion.

The sonorous V6 is truly something special in this age of hum drum and characterless 4 cylinder turbos.

Great torque, city driving in top gear, and still pulls.

Averaging 29.8 MPG with mixed city / rural driving. Motorway runs gave me 37 MPG.

Handles fantastic. Best FWD car I have driven with the combo of grip and power from the V6. More more balanced than my old Civic Type R. More fun than my RCZ.

Looks amazing, and so cheap to buy / insure.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th March, 2013

2005 MG ZS MG 180 V6 saloon 2.5 V6 petrol

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2011
Most recent year of ownership2011
Engine and transmission 2.5 V6 petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.5 / 10
Distance when acquired44000 miles

Summary:

Excellent 'drivers' performance car

Faults:

Clutch biting point felt a little low, but has not gotten any worse, so may just be a characteristic of the car.

General Comments:

A real surprise package. The more you drive it, the more you want to drive it. Fantastic steering and steering balance. Love the looks, big spoiler, side skirts and 18 inch alloys. Looks like a performance car and drives like one too. Have driven faster cars for sure but this engine is wonderfully tractable, sounds great and pulls smoothly and evenly through all the gears.

Took a little getting used to, as it does not have the big sudden power wallop of a turbo car, but once you adjust to that, driving this car becomes a surprising pleasure. It makes you want to drive and go in search of country roads to extend the engine. And country lanes is where this car is best suited. That wonderfully sporty exhaust note, that sounds great revving up and down the gears, might become a little irritating on a long motorway jaunt. With the last point in mind, this car would also benefit from a little more sound proofing, but companies such as 'Noise Killer' could easily put that right.

On the whole, I would have to say that this is a fantastic car for all those of you who 'really' like driving, and when you take into consideration that fact that this car (as at time of writing) can be purchased in mint condition, with 44k miles, for less than £4k, well that just, for me, completely seals the argument. Top Car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 27th February, 2011

1st Mar 2011, 04:08

Absolutely spot on with your review, the only thing is I would give it a higher overall rating. I know what you mean about not having that big torquey punch of a turbo car, but this engine is smooth and 'even' with its power, and if you rev it, then it is quite blistering off the line. An excellent car!!!

Recommend whole heatedly. Watched that review from the link. Fantastic. Great video review. You really get to see and hear the car in action.

Would recommend this car highly!

1st Mar 2011, 06:46

Thanks for the youtube link.

15th Mar 2011, 07:40

Great YouTube video review. Great to see someone review this car in a fair and balanced way.

2005 MG ZS 180 2.5 petrol

Model year2004
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 2.5 petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired9000 miles
Most recent distance23000 miles
Previous carMG ZS

Summary:

Great value for money

Faults:

Nothing.

General Comments:

Car is very quick, especially now I have changed the induction and exhaust. 0-60 is now down to around 6.5 seconds.

Car handles very well with little body roll.

Full leather sports seats are really comfy too.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 30th June, 2007

6th Mar 2013, 14:26

With all due respect, a sports air filter and loud back box will never get this car to go 0-60 in 6.5 seconds!

2005 MG ZS 180 2.5L V6

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.5L V6 Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.2 / 10
Distance when acquired98 miles
Most recent distance1100 miles
Previous carSubaru Impreza

Summary:

Top Notch!

Faults:

1. Squeaky clutch return spring. Fixed with a blob of grease.

2. Tailgaters. Why do people do that? If only they knew how good the brakes are.

3. For my tastes modern drive by sound tests leave all new cars audibly castrated, so I fitted a Piper Cams big bore pipe. The ‘Z’ now sounds like the Aston from the Italian Job! I now drive every where with the rear windows open!

General Comments:

What an amazing thing it is. I still can’t believe MG-Rover didn’t make more of its capabilities. It’s fantastic! The all alloy KV6 is the sweetest 6 I have ever owned. Soooo smooth around town, then open her up on a B road and listen to the engine note change to a bark as the variable intake system opens fully. Heaven! This is a genuinely fast car, hampered off the line due to the fact there is no traction control, but on the move it comes into its own. Overtaking is no problem at any speed. This car makes very good use of it’s circa 180BHP.

As for the chassis you could not ask for more from a FWD platform. It has virtually zero torque steer and from a car that has 144 BHP per tonne that’s no mean feat. The steering is sharp and precise due to the fact that it has a higher geared rack than the standard 45, plus MG fitted much stiffer poly bushes instead of rubber ones to the ZS’s all-round double wish bone suspension. Yes that’s right, double wish bone at the front, with a double wish bone set up on the rear helped out with the aid of a trailing arm to control and adjust toe-in/out. It also has up rated anti-roll bars to maintain body control. The brakes are powerful and very progressive.

To liken the car to any other is difficult as there aren’t many Escort sized cars with ruddy great V6’s shoehorned under the bonnet. All I can say is, if an Alfa 166 V6 got it on with an Impreza T2000 the 180 ZS would be the outcome of this unlikely, but beautiful pairing!

Other plus points are:

Electronic ABS

Speed sensitive PAS

Park distance sensors

Leather and suede seats

Single CD head unit with 6 disk CD MP3 multi-changer in the boot

Climate control

Mk2 looks the DB’s with its wider wheels, track and body kit.

New “TT” style dash is pleasing to the eye.

29 MPG is achievable, will go down if provoked.

Big boot with split rear seats plus remote key opening.

Cat 1 immobiliser and alarm to deal with thieving scum and lowlifes.

They are now very cheap to buy, even new. About the price of a Fiat Punto.

If you need any more convincing, go to any search engine and type in Tiff Needell and MG 180 ZS, say no more!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 5th February, 2006

12th Feb 2006, 15:30

Engine is aluminium not alloy. very weak as i went up a grass verge in mine and got a hole in engine and wrote it off.

16th Mar 2006, 16:20

Not a fault of the engine if you went up a grass verge, Most engines are cast from aluminium which is always alloyed with other metals. A pure aluminium casting would be even weaker and less stable.

Average review marks: 7.9 / 10, based on 9 reviews